So like most hard questions in a free society, we need to look at property. And when it comes to people and property it comes to self-ownership. So when looking into topics covering sexuality we need to look at whether or not the decisions of sex are voluntary or involuntary. Are the acts of sex consensual or not?

Prostitution

Okay, so of course 2 adults consenting to have sex in a free society, as well as most societies, is perfectly fine and valid. Where it comes into question is when people are having sex for money, as is the case for prostitution. If we look at prostitution we will see that one party is exchanging sex for money while the other is exchanging money for sex. In a free market, trades and transactions that both parties agree to are perfectly valid and do not violate the non-aggression principle or property rights. If a man pays for sex with a woman and they both agree to it, the man is voluntarily exchanging his property of money for sex while the woman is voluntarily exchanging her property of herself for money. This is a perfectly valid thing to happen in a free society.

And I know this may make some people feel a bit uneasy, since a lot of societies look down upon prostitution. Now we have to look at the whole point of a free society: maximum freedom and choice. This is what a free society is all about. If people are both agreeing to decisions that do not affect other people who do not agree to it then that is not a problem. There is no property being violated in this regard. Somebody paying for sex is no different in principle than somebody paying for entertainment in any other area of life.

So yes, prostitution is perfectly valid and allowed in a free society. This doesn't mean everyone has to do it. This doesn't mean that society favors prostitution or disfavors it. It just means that people have the freedom to do whatever the parties involved agree to do. That's the whole point of freedom. Not everybody has to agree on the same rights and wrongs. People can individually live life the way they want and avoid having other people infringe on that life.

Rape

With that said, of course rape would not be condoned in any way in a free society. Rape and sex are completely different. Sex and prostitution are consensual and voluntary. Both parties agree to take part. But when it comes to rape both parties do not agree to take part. In rape 1 person in not acting voluntarily and is having the initiation of force used on them. In this regard rape is a direct violation of the non-aggression principle and as such would face the legal repercussions of the free society.

To what degree something is rape and isn't is also a gray area. And as it is handled in most societies currently, it would be investigated and determined through a legal process of evidence. And of course, since free markets provide better quality services than the government, the free market legal system would be really good about determining what is rape and what isn't, and even more so on protecting people from rape to begin with.

Child Prostitution / Statutory Rape

So now let's move on to child prostitution. Of course, this is a fairly tricky question because in this we are dealing with children, and the point a child becomes an adult isn't always cut and dry. There is a gray area of when children become adults, and therefore, there is a gray area of when somebody is consenting to sex and when they are not. We have previously done an article and video on the topic of when a child becomes an adult so it would be good to first take a look at that.

Now with most things a child is unable to give consent. A child is not like an adult and is not practicing full self-ownership. So in this regard a child is not able to consent to sex with an adult because they do not fully own themselves.

Conversely, adults know this and because of this face much greater risks when dealing with children and minors sexually, and other ways as well. Since children are more fragile and less self-aware other adults are held to a much greater accountability when dealing with them. So if an adult attempts to persuade or successfully persuades a minor or child into sex this will be handled much more harshly than if they persuade an adult into having sex. So when adults are dealing with consenting sex they had better be sure that the other individual is an adult and showing full self-ownership. If they are not they are taking a huge risk by moving forward.

As has previously been stated, this does of course get gray. Take for example a 16 year old girl who is more mature than a 20 year old woman. It is entirely possible for a 16 year old girl to be more mature and show greater self-ownership than a 20 year old woman. Of course this is not normally the case, which is why we tend to generalize for certain ages and cutoffs. But of course this is possible. And most of us probably are aware of younger people who act older than their age and of older people who act younger than their age. And when it comes to something like this the adult has to be extremely careful.

If it could be proven legally that a 16 year old is practicing self-ownership and capable of making her own decisions independently of others then consensual sex between her and an older man may not be considered statutory rape. Maybe the 16 year old has developed physically quicker than most, maybe she is already in college or some form of work and is living on her own without the help of anyone else. This could give credence to greater self-ownership than a 16 year old who still lives with her parents and who doesn't have a job or plan for what to do with her life. And of course it's possible that a 20 year old or even 25 year old woman could still be in a similar situation. So of course there are trends and general patterns that can be derived from this, but there are going to be exceptions as well. Not everyone is the same. And if somebody really is mature then they should be treated that way. People should have maximum freedom.

The underlying argument here is that younger people do not know what's best for themselves and as such we need to help shelter them and protect them from dangers and bad decisions. But this really isn't the best way to look at it. Because that's all life is. Life is a continual graduation from inferior choices towards superior choices. In generally people start out in life pretty naive and dumb and with time and experience become more wise in their decision process. Younger people usually eat worse than adults. Younger people usually drive worse than adults. Younger people go into debt more than adults. Younger people do a lot of things worse than adults because they aren't as experienced.

What this basically means is that a lot of this comes down to the actual parents themselves. Parents need to take responsibility for their children and be actual parents and help guide them in their decision process. The same way parents teach their children about health and finance, so too do they need to teach their children about sex. They need to guide their children towards the dangers of sex and the way people will try to trick them and exploit their lack of awareness and experience.

Child Molestation

Let's move over to child molestation and sexual abuse. This is obviously a terrible, terrible thing and an unfortunate thing that some children have to face. Let me first bring to the forefront that all societies currently have this problem. All societies in the world currently have child molesters and people who abuse children sexually. So right now it is currently a problem. So if this happens in a free society, which it most likely will, we have to understand that there are people like this in any society.

But can it be prevented more in a free society? I tend to think so. Like a lot of violent behavior, when handled through the free market the incentives are such that violent behavior is costly and agonizing for the aggressor of such an act. A free society won't handle these types of crimes by simply locking somebody up and giving them food the rest of their life. In a free society they will completely cut you out of society and not participate with you. People will not provide you food or resources in a free society if you are an offending child molester, or practicing behavior that can lead to such acts. And all the services in a free society will know this and be geared around this.

The whole free society in general will be geared towards punishing people who initiate force on others, especially children and minors. Defense agencies will charge more money for their services if you're violent and will give discounts if you're safe. Businesses will keep track of the reputation of individuals and know if they've committed crimes in the past and will charge more or not do business with them if they have. There are tons of non-violent market forces that will be at play in a free society that will completely turn the incentives towards this behavior against the people committing such acts. These are all things we don't normally think about now because the whole legal process is outdated and not under a free market which allows for the best methods to rise to the top.

So molestation of children is obviously heavily frowned upon in a free society and will be dealt with in the most severe of ways. But let's look at this a bit further. Right now majority of people spank their children. Spanking has been shown to be harmful to children in a number of ways. You are much better off not spanking your children than spanking them.

But aren't children the property of their parents in a free society and therefore a parent can spank them if they want? This is an interesting question. Spanking is the initiation of force on a child. If we were to spank an adult in a free society that would be a violation of the non-aggression principle. But with children is it different since they aren't adults? No! It's actually the opposite.

Look, if we were to take this same principle that it is okay to initiate force on your child then by that same logic it is okay to rape your child. And that can't possibly be the case. So children do not fall under this property contract since they are unable to consent to it. Children can not consent to be aggressed against and as such rape and sexual abuse is wrong. And to take it even further, spanking is also wrong. Spanking is just a lesser degree of violence. But it is still the initiation of violence on a child.

So children are not property that parents can do what they want with. Children are property that is vulnerable and that the parents chose to bring into their life by having them or by adopting them.

Conclusion

So all of these things follow the non-aggression principle which is derived from property and self-ownership. And sometimes there will be gray area where a court or arbitration service will be needed to determine the outcome.

The dynamics of how the legal system works should also be borne in mind. If you haven't already read or watched the video on that you should check it out. What this basically amounts to is that because the legal system is done through the free market, that means that the laws and ways they work ultimately are in the hands of the people who pay for these services.

So the people in the free society, in general, determine the cutoffs and rights and wrongs for these sexual type questions. If the people paying for legal services want something to be done about child molestation then they will support laws, courts and contracts which lean in this direction. The people will choose to work with services that align to their values on how a society should function. And these will all be built with the underlying principle of property and non-aggression. With time these types of disputes will become more and more well-defined. This is how common law works. Rather than having some overseeing body like the government determine what the law is it allows the people and the market to determine that. It allows the best solutions to rise to the top.

All of this should be kept in mind when thinking about these topics, because they are difficult and tricky topics. But at the end of the day if you have the right principles everything else should fall into place. And property and the non-aggression principle is about as foundational as you can get towards good principles.

11:20amQuinton: We need to get people in communication and involved with this process before actually going for it.

9:05amCaptainDrG: Greeting Quenton, thank you. You have made my job easier. I've actually develop a model, with training programs and processes to scale up what this concept. For the past twenty five years been actually developing the Information Age model, testing getting the bugs out. Research and Development is expensive. We are ready to lay out the full blown model across America and the world. Let stay connected. Great minds think just alike. Captain Dr. Gerald Higginbotham.

3:58pmAeiusCercle: Greetings. Introducing myself. Just joined. Will interact more after I learn more about how to navigate/contribute through this web-site.

10:28pmQuinton: Welcome to the site AeiusCercle, thanks for joining! :)

6:07pmwayfarer: Greetings to all. Just looking around, and when I can contribute to the site I'll chime in.

2:15pmCamdromeda: Hi All! Stoked to have randomly found this site. I've been thinking for a while about how society can be reorganised, based on non-violent principles. I really believe it would work. And I believe that left to their own devices, most people are pretty great. And I don't think questions and uncertainty should keep us chained to systems that clearly do not work. Creative people and entrepreneurs are well suited to the types of problems we currently face and I'm really excited to be joining and seeing where I can contribute my skills.

11:18amJohn Huckel: I call my system MultiLevel Governance. It is a completely Internet-based method for people to get together for ACTION - not just chatting. (paragraph break) We won't have to go anywhere - just start undoing the hold our traditional Governments have over us. (para break) You will never have to deal with more than 7 people at a time. The system allows for anonymous participation: 1) informal Chatting; 2) serious Deliberation regarding whatever is under discussion; Voting for a Plan of Action; and even the Funding of the Plan. (para break) On Dropbox, you can see it once - then it insists you download it to somewhere else. (para break) I am very pleased to have found you guys. Please let me know your reactions. John

11:41amThrob: I listened to a video and felt need to comment on a fundamental &amp; mistaken belief about government and taxes.

11:44amThrob: Here's reality, Money Changers run and control everything. U.$. Taxes are laundered to the City of London thru their IMF collection AGENCY in PUERTO RICO called the IRS.

11:44amThrob: A foreign owned for profit Corporation as per listing on Dun &amp; Bradstreet.